'Religious, political, social and criminal are four major causes of terrorism' - The Times of India

Senior IPS officer Sudhansu Sarangi went to England recently to receive PhD from the University of Liverpool for research on terrorism, a global menace that has not spared India by any long shot. He spoke to Rajaram Satapathy to share his views on terrorism and terrorists.

Q- Many must have done research on terrorism. What is special about your study?

A-Research on terrorism is an intricate task, given the kind of horrific crimes terrorists perpetrate and the secretive manner in which they live. Since 9/11 there has been a proliferation of research on terrorism. The Israelis and the Americans have some of the most active research programmes trying to understand how people are drawn into terrorism. But most of the works are based on secondary data, media reports and anecdotal accounts. Mine is a first-hand research carried out through extensive psychological interviews and assessments with 49 terrorists involved in some of the most heinous terror crimes India has witnessed. I met them in different prisons around the country. This is virtually the first such research into Jihadi terrorism in the world.

Q- Are they all Indians?

A- Of the 49, 16 are Pakistanis, rest are Indians. The Pakistanis came to India as Mujahedeens to commit violence and were subsequently arrested. The 49 included 14 surrendered militants in Kashmir. I wanted to meet disengaged militants so that we can understand not merely why people join terrorism, but also how and why some decide to withdraw from terrorism.

Q-Did they know that you were not interrogating them as a policeman?

A- The research was purely of an academic nature and conducted in prisons visited by the international committee of the Red Cross. Only willing persons were interviewed and they were told that they can stop the interview at any point or decline to answer any question. Some, in fact, did not give consent and so interviews could not be conducted with them. Many of them chatted freely and they revealed much more than what was expected.

Q-What did you feel about them?

A- The first thing you realize is that they are normal people, with normal emotions and are capable of normal human relationships. They were polite, though rhetorical and firm. Till now there were many speculations about the psychological process terrorists go through in deciding to join terror outfits. I found many of these surmises wrong and some were rather limited in their ability to explain the current trend of global terrorism.

Q- What made them terrorists?

A-The popular perception is that some vulnerable persons are brainwashed by terrorist leaders through propaganda to join terrorism. But the reality is different. They consciously decided to become terrorists and were not victims of propaganda really. No one sleepwalks into terrorism.

Q- Why? What is so attractive in becoming a terrorist?

A- I found four major influences: religious, political, social and criminal, though for most there is a combination of one or more of these four factors. The religious influence is based on their commitment for a particular interpretation of Islam. Others became terrorists to advance their political grievance, which they thought could be achieved by using terrorism as a tool. Some are even influenced by peer pressure and their understanding of social approval and then there were individuals who strayed from a criminal past to become terrorists to maximize their gains.

Q-Why do terrorists operate under different banners? Violence seemingly being their single goal, why are there so many organizations in circulation?

A- There are many ideological divisions among Jihadi organizations. Also, they keep changing names and mutating to evade legal sanctions. However, with the war on terror, the Afghanistan-Pakistan region has become the epicenter of terrorism and ideological divisions are getting blurred. In 1998 Osama floated an organization called the Global Front for Jihad, which views India as an enemy as much as the Western countries and Israel. Being in such a volatile neighborhood India is affected. Disaffected youth from India have taken the help of the global terror network to carry out attacks in India. The global war on terror has indeed brought a variety of outfits together. They share logistics and support each other in carrying out attacks.

Q-Do you think India's proximity to these two countries has made our country vulnerable to terror attacks.

A-Most of the terrorist outfits operate from Pakistan and Afghanistan, the epicenter of global terrorism. And Kashmir being next to the border, terrorists find it as an easy target to create violence. Amidst all this, what is really creating a danger for us is that some disaffected youth are going to Afghanistan, Pakistan region to get training and support from the global terror network to perpetrate crimes back home. India is mostly vulnerable to attacks by Laskhar-e-Toiba (LeT), Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) and their affiliates.

Q- Do youth from poor families take to terrorism?

A- Not really. Many are educated and come from middle class families. No one among the 49 became a terrorist because of economic reasons.

Q- Do they regret having become terrorists and ending up in jails?

A-Many were a sad lot and some were extremely angry with terrorist leaders who had misled them. They miss their families, children, parents and wives. During the interviews some cried so inconsolably that they had to be repeatedly consoled. Many said given a chance, many would prefer to join the mainstream and lead a normal life. Their family members meet them in jails rarely amidst security restrictions. Some have realized that terrorism is not the answer to problems though they said a lot about the training and strategies planned. They regret becoming terrorists.

Q-Can Maoists be called terrorists?

A-If one goes by the UN definition, then crimes committed by Maoists against government constituted under the law and civilian population will be termed as terrorism. Terrorism is defined in a variety of ways. After 9/11 there is greater consensus in the world not to enter into debate about definition of terrorism. People feel such fine distinctions and debates are no more tenable. Illegitimate use of force by non-state actors and crime against government and civilian populations has to be termed as terrorism irrespective of root causes and lofty goals. The use of such violence as a means is not acceptable in a civilized world.